Honestly investing in just one type of green energy isn’t smart specially solar, they should go with all of them in case scientific development proves one is superior to the other and to diversify. Primarily nuclear but I assume they are going the solar way because it can generate more consumption because individuals need to buy their owm panels unlike nuclear where the State builds a plant. It is similar to the trains versus cars scenario.
Exactly. I live in a land-locked state that exports energy to a coastal state, and there’s a lot of unoccupied space between us and that coastal state. So it would be really easy to build a nuclear plant and bury the nuclear waste in an unoccupied area (we have a lot of that in the US). But we don’t because of FUD, which is super dumb.
I really like renewables like solar and wind, but we need a solid base that can run constantly. It’s a lot easier and probably way more environmentally friendly to generate nuclear power than try to store a ton of excess power from renewable sources.
Nuclear power is by far the best source of renewable energy, if you look at China’s plan to reach zero net emissions, for example, the want to use basically 40% nuclear and 40% solar, with the rest of the 10% from other various types (this of course can change if there are developments in some area) but nuclear right now is safe and effective. The only thing you need is to keep those plants in very good conditions, most nuclear disasters where caused by not having everything in the state it should and the technology of its time, we have much better knowledge now. The FUD is obviously propagandised by big oil companies because they know nuclear can replace them in the blink of an eye if we wouldn’t have useless politicians in place that leech off of lobbying in the congress.
Honestly investing in just one type of green energy isn’t smart specially solar, they should go with all of them in case scientific development proves one is superior to the other and to diversify. Primarily nuclear but I assume they are going the solar way because it can generate more consumption because individuals need to buy their owm panels unlike nuclear where the State builds a plant. It is similar to the trains versus cars scenario.
Fukushima.
What does Japan have to do with the US?
Exactly. I live in a land-locked state that exports energy to a coastal state, and there’s a lot of unoccupied space between us and that coastal state. So it would be really easy to build a nuclear plant and bury the nuclear waste in an unoccupied area (we have a lot of that in the US). But we don’t because of FUD, which is super dumb.
I really like renewables like solar and wind, but we need a solid base that can run constantly. It’s a lot easier and probably way more environmentally friendly to generate nuclear power than try to store a ton of excess power from renewable sources.
Nuclear power is by far the best source of renewable energy, if you look at China’s plan to reach zero net emissions, for example, the want to use basically 40% nuclear and 40% solar, with the rest of the 10% from other various types (this of course can change if there are developments in some area) but nuclear right now is safe and effective. The only thing you need is to keep those plants in very good conditions, most nuclear disasters where caused by not having everything in the state it should and the technology of its time, we have much better knowledge now. The FUD is obviously propagandised by big oil companies because they know nuclear can replace them in the blink of an eye if we wouldn’t have useless politicians in place that leech off of lobbying in the congress.